network and server issues while some could be traced to user error due to an (unexpected)deficiency of basic computer skills of some of the freshmen, particular early in the semester. Asample of positive comments included: - “immediate feedback” - “being able to figure out what I had learned and what I hadn't understood” - “The VSAS system helped me figure out what I did and didn't know through a series of questions” - “The real time evaluation of our answers to relevant questions allowed us to learn our mistakes quickly and gain enhanced understanding by our answers along with the answers of our peers
Score5. Final selection for admission will be based on the total scores obtained out of 100 weightage as follows:(a) Admission Test Score(50%), (b) Results of SSC/'O' level (20%)and (c) Results of HSC/'A' level/Equivalent exams(30%)For admission test waiver the candidates seeking admission in the Faculty of Sciences andEngineering must have minimum CGPA 3.5 in Math and Physics separately in HSC/A levelexaminations in addition to a minimum total score of 1500 in SAT (considering Critical Reading,Math and Writing). Admission test will also be waived for the GPA 5.00 without 4th subjectmarks in the latest SSC & HSC exams or 7'As' in 'O' level (at one sitting) and 3 'As' in 'A' level.Students who have completed a two-year Bachelor's degree
order of magnitude judgments and use measurement unit systems and conversions. • Evaluate: Competence in selection, modification and operation of appropriate engineering tools and resources. Page 25.627.6 • Communicate: Communicating effectively both orally and in writing at levels ranging from executive summaries to comprehensive technical reports.In parallel, the success rate of generating maximum learner involvement, leading to activelearning, is likely to increase if the facilitator also chooses to pay sufficient attention to thefollowing important aspects of group work: a) Group Formation: a
-day electronic devices. Page 25.688.4Common, low-cost devices that are simple to operate were chosen as the focus of the systems-level thinking activities. Students would make general observations about the device, thendisassemble it, discover how it works, and in some cases reverse engineer it. It was stressed thatprevious knowledge of electrical components was not required which made it easier for studentsto write a systems level diagram.Specifically, labs involved the use of a solar powered garden lamp and a disposable camera asthe focus of the systems-level thinking activities. For example, when discovering the disposablecamera, the
enough toprepare the students for the work environment. Toward that end, the first semester typicallyprovides the foundational principles the student teams will use to produce their design at thecompletion of the second semester.Initially, the first semester is relatively heavy in terms of lectures, discussions, anddevelopmental assignments designed to provide the students with the fundamental principles ofSystem Engineering, Project Management, the Project Life Cycle, and the tools of ProjectDesign including such topics as requirements definition, concept of operations, workbreakdown structure, schedule management, and configuration management. Coveringrequirements definition alone (as well as how to write a good requirement) could consume
, graphics editor, and presentation software. Each student also archives his or her engineering work in a personal engineering notebook that is periodically reviewed.4. Study how engineering practice relates to a professional code of ethics. Students examine peer-reviewed case studies, identify ethical dilemmas, and propose professional practice solutions.The following student outcomes are assessed during the semester: • Ability to design and realize an electronic system to meet performance constraints. Page 25.788.2 • Ability to create experiments and draw meaningful conclusions from experimental data. • Ability to function as a
unit.During their research students were told to keep records of all their work. At the end of thecourse, students turned in all documentation created (in the form of several-inch-thick binders) aswell as bound reports of their research. Students were encouraged to use the reports whenapplying to internships as a way to show the research they had performed and evidence of theirrecordkeeping and writing skills.The entire course concluded with two final presentations of the student groups, with smaller, in-class presentations throughout the class to improve students’ public speaking skills. The finalpresentations consisted of a poster presentation as well as a more formal presentation to a groupof peers. The poster presentation allowed the student to
become a scientist.2 In general, a longitudinal study that followed a cohort ofsixth graders through age 25 found that students who participated in extra-curricular academicclubs were more likely to be enrolled in college at 21 than their non-involved peers.3The Math, Engineering, Science Achievement (MESA) program utilizes a co-curricular programthat supports educationally disadvantaged students by providing pathways for minority studentsto succeed in science, mathematics and engineering disciplines.4 MESA was started in 1970 asan inter-segmental program, administered through the California Public School System,Community College System, and California College System. Because of the success of MESA inCalifornia, the program has expanded to seven
expressed in the interviews was that womenstudents needed to complete several research projects or grant proposals for their adviserswithout compensation before receiving continuous funding support. When asked about “fundingopportunities and resources,” several doctoral students reported similar stories: I need[ed] to work for free to prove myself and that definitely brought my confidence down a lot. I didn’t feel like he respected my work just because I was working for free, and I’d have to [teach] and then do research and write proposals for him, and I just didn’t feel like it was the right situation. And [more advanced women doctoral students] told me that, "Oh, yeah… you need to work for free here [in the lab] to
does one think is inside the appliance andhow does what is inside it work together to allow the appliance to operate in the way it does?Prior familiarity with the device is not necessary. The second meeting is held a week to two weeks later and introduces the first step of anongoing assessment. At this time each group will submit a report on their progress. Studentshave a chance to discuss with the instructor any challenges they are facing, including teammember contributions to the project and documentation activities including Pro/Engineer. Thethird meeting is held two weeks after the second meeting. At this time each group will provide a10 – 15 minute PowerPoint presentation to their peers on their results, assemble the unitfollowing
tohave at least 4 members of staff present to supervise and assess the students. Even using thisresource, assessment proved to be a very difficult task. Staff used checklists whilst observingstudents. The number of tasks observed was around 12, with groups of students being mixed forseveral tasks. This meant that staff were formulating opinions on all 50 students. Students werealso asked to peer review their colleagues and fill in the checklists. It was therefore difficult tocome to a clear judgement for each student as there were several hundred checklists filled in!This last year it was decided to take more staff and allocated 10 students per member of staff toact as facilitators of their learning and development. No summative assessment of
). Page 15.1292.6Power is supplied by a 6V battery to power the controller and their logic Ics. An active sensor will be ~ 6V(including logic “1”) and an inactive sensor will be ~0V (indicating “0”). The controller circuit is constructedon a breadboard and connected to the elevator using a ribbon cable with a specified writing pin configuration. Figure 4 Design of a model elevator controller project (a) paper design (not to scale) (b) actual designEgg Mover ProjectThe requirement of this project to design build, and demonstrate a device that will pick up, move and place araw grade “A” large egg. To start the test, the egg is placed on a spot 2.4 m from a 2 x 6 (38mm x 140mm)that is on edge. The engineering object is to pick up the egg, move it
improvements included changes in the curriculum, schedule,application and participant selection process, survey, and outreach efforts.Curriculum Improvements. Three new engineering topics, an industry site visit, and luncheondiscussions with professional engineers were added. The latter two improvements were madebased on experiences recommended by peer institutions (see Engineering Summer ProgramsBest Practices Conference presentations at www.thecb.state.tx.us).The new engineering topics included more contemporary engineering subjects that focus onparticipant hobbies as well as increase the overall camp attractiveness to the regional participantsbased on the suggestions provided by the previous camp participants. The 2009 camp wascomposed of four in
as well. As shown later in their feedback and testimonials, theyhave gained valuable knowledge that they deemed of great importance to them, their families,and their social peers. The educational experience and the interaction between the students andthe health team were invaluable. The CS students, and their professors, benefited immenselyfrom not only coding the design and requirements, but also from learning (in these particularprojects) about the extent to which diet, exercise, and early screening are lacking in their region,and about the need to become active in areas besides Computer Science.As the software development process started, the two females met on a regular basis with facultyfrom both schools to iron out any issues or detail
met the next week, two students were then chosen at random togive their presentations. The students were not told ahead of time who would be presenting, andthe entire project group was graded according to the presentation of the group member that waschosen to present. This encouraged every student to no only make sure that they understood thematerial, but that the other members of their group also understood the material. In addition tothe group project grades, two exams were giving during the semester to insure that the studentswere getting individual assessment. Also, a peer evaluation was conducted at the end of thesemester to judge the participation of all group members.Basic ProjectsThe microprocessor chosen for this course is
our recruitment. The scholars will also cross-pollinate their research with the university since they will be from other institutions. We hope this experience will lay the groundwork for future collaborations in both research and teaching. The timing of the Ph.D. candidate/post-doc visit is unique and taps into a potent and sometimes unused resource. Ph.D. candidates who are writing their dissertation, or just finished with it are in transition from graduate school to a job and are at the leading edge technically. By giving them a short 3-6 month experience that taps into their research expertise and helps prepare them to communicate and teach, we will provide an excellent stepping stone
economyOutcomes 1, 3, 4, and 5 contribute to developing the students’ design abilities and experience,while outcomes 2, 3,4, and 5 specifically address design as a global, multi-cultural activity.These outcomes are assessed in three ways. First, each student group prepares and delivers anoral presentation describing their design process and demonstrating the resulting product.Second, each group writes a technical report detailing their design and the process used todevelop it. Third, each student in the class completes a questionnaire about the course, itsactivities, and their experiences, including peer collaboration and contributions. The first twoassessments look closely at students’ design experience, while the third gives feedback on thestudents
experiential, this “case study” approach is presented as asource of additional information to consider when examining the learning goals and processesassociated with developing student capability and interest in the research process. Page 24.584.2For background, one needs to know the experiences of the student author. As a sophomore Iapproached the faculty member with the purpose of joining a research lab to gain expertisewithin the field of human factors. From my perspective, it was overall viewed as a “graduatelevel research experience.” But after spending two years in the research lab environment, it wasrealized that this was more than just writing a
Research, 61(2), 218–238.12. Kulhavy, R.W., & W.A. Stock. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279–308.13. Nelson, M.M. & C.D. Schunn. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401.14. Bjorklund, S.A., J.M. Parente, & D. Sathianathan. (2002). Effects of faculty interaction and feedback on gains in student skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 153-160.15. Kuh, G.D. & S. Hu. (2001). The Effects of Student-Faculty Interaction In the 1990s. The Review of Higher Education, 24(3), 309-332.16. Moreno, R., M. Reisslein, & G. Ozogul. (2009). Optimizing
a Ph.D. in civil engineering from Georgia Tech.Dr. Lee W. Lee, Central Connecticut State University Chair and Professor at Central Connecticut State University Department of Management and Organization Senior Fulbright Scholar Page 24.161.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 An Exploratory Study to Identify an Effective Pedagogical Approach to Teaching Math-Related Content Knowledge in Construction EducationIntroductionBrown1 and Mohr2 mentioned that reading, writing, and math skills are essential in any kind
. 17Within engineering, students have been known to cheat on graded assessments such as homework, Page 24.226.4examinations, and laboratory reports and plagiarize text, sourcecode, diagrams, and otherrepresentations of their work. Examples of unintentional sourcecode plagiarism include reusing theirown code from previous assignments, providing false references, extensive collaboration with peers, andusing code without attribution if converted to another language.18Contextualizing the ProblemDuring the Fall 2013 Faculty Institute (an inservice workshop for faculty) at an historically blackcollege and university a 90minute workshop titled
research in an international setting. She is a fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers, a commissioner of the Engineering Accred- itation Commission of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, and a member of the American Society for Engineering Education and Tau Beta Pi, the national engineering honor society. She earned her doctorate in civil engineering from the University of California at Berkeley. She holds a Master of Science degree from the George Washington University and earned a Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering at Howard University. She is the author of several engineering publications including articles in peer-reviewed engineering education journals.Mr. Silas E. Burris
Paper ID #9116Characterizing and Modeling the experience of Transfer Students in Engi-neeringDr. Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University and Central Queensland University Matthew W. Ohland is Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University and a Professorial Re- search Fellow at Central Queensland University. He has degrees from Swarthmore College, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Florida. His research on the longitudinal study of engineer- ing students, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and collaborative teaching methods has been supported by over $12.8 million from the National
. Atypical semester includes the following schedule of activities: Month Focus of Cohort Meetings January Resources for Success Workshop facilitated by school-/campus-level office (e.g., Learning Assistance Center; Writing Center; Math Assistance Center) to promote Scholar achievement at the start of the spring semester (based on needs assessment). February Career Development Workshop to help students prepare for summer internship, cooperative education, study abroad, or undergraduate research opportunities. March Leadership Development Workshop, facilitated by an industrial representative from the Dean’s Industry Advisory Council (DIAC) on an
introduced to fluidmechanics and CFD software. Students watch short (1-15 minute) videos covering the basicprinciples of fluid mechanics over several days, and complete an accompanying worksheet forthe derivation of a velocity profile across a cylindrical channel. Following their completion ofthis worksheet, students complete a guided worksheet for a rectangular channel during class,using the principles discussed in the videos and the cylindrical coordinates worksheet.After completing the worksheets, students use their derived equations to write a program (usingMATLAB, C++, or LabVIEW) to determine flow characteristics of an incompressibleNewtonian fluid through a rectangular channel. Also after completion of these worksheets,students perform a two
Evening was simply one facet of thethree-pronged exploration curriculum comprised of career research prior to the event, the eventitself, and directed reflection and writing that help the students synthesize the overall experience.The exploration curriculum was assumed seamlessly into our overall undergraduate careerdevelopment plan and was implemented through our engineering student success courses.Understanding that the engineering faculty teaching the success courses are not careerdevelopment experts, the career exploration curriculum incorporated online components as wellas face-to-face components in the classroom that were lead by our career center staff and ourtrained career peer coaches. Since the faculty has ultimate authority over their
AC 2012-4103: ”LIFE CYCLE SUSTAINABILITY ECONOMICS” MOD-ULEDr. K.J. Rogers, University of Texas, ArlingtonDr. Melanie L. Sattler, University of Texas, Arlington Melanie Sattler serves as an Associate Professor at the University of Texas, Arlington, where she teaches courses and conducts research related to air quality and sustainable energy. Her research has been spon- sored by the National Science Foundation, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Luminant Power, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. She has published more than 60 peer- reviewed papers and conference proceedings. In 2010, she received UT Arlington’s Lockheed Martin Excellence in Engineering Education Award. She is a registered
solidand hazardous waste facilities after other public officials have already made decisionsregarding the facilities. Even when engineers are involved in the early stages of thedecision making process, engineering concerns may not prevail. In this context when baddecisions are made inexperienced environmental engineers often make the mistake ofsuccumbing to peer pressure and trying to make the best of a bad situation. This canresult in an ethical failure if engineers continue to participate in the design of a facilitythat is not protective of human health and the environment. This is not to suggest thatengineers are ultimately responsible for environmental injustices. Environmentalinjustice is a failure of government and policy makers to enact and
Colorado’sinstitutions of higher education to address the needs of women and underrepresented students,and she plans to continue to expand the Colorado diversity programs, providing newopportunities for tomorrow’s leaders. Dr. El-Hakim also serves as co-principal investigator at the Colorado State Universitysite as director of the Colorado Alliance for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP).She is principal investigator for the Fast Track to Work Graduate Scholarship Program, CSEMSUndergraduate Scholarship Program, and the Technology Transfer and Training Center Program,as well, and has directed peer advising, training, and enrichment programs for Hispanic andNative American youth in the Four Corners Region. She continues to write and be
sources for other supportmaterials. Activities focus on lectures, debates, reports and presentations. Students analyze,interpret and report on topics.Abstract RandomThe abstract/random learner is people-oriented, not product-oriented, and can be characterizedas lively and spontaneous (Gregorc, 1982). They can be described as imaginative, perceptive andspontaneous. Individuals in this category prefer to focus on themes, ideas, feelings and activitiesthat allow for group interaction and communication (Butler, 1987).“Abstract random teachers write global objectives. Outcomes show the students’ understanding,appreciation, and interpretation of the subject matter as well as of themselves” (Butler, 1987).Their classes provide students many ways to